[PATCH v3 14/25] KVM: TDX: Bug the VM if extended the initial measurement fails

[Sean Christopherson]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025, Kai Huang wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-10-16 at 17:32 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > WARN and terminate the VM if TDH_MR_EXTEND fails, as extending the
> > measurement should fail if and only if there is a KVM bug, or if the S-EPT
> > mapping is invalid, and it should be impossible for the S-EPT mappings to
> > be removed between kvm_tdp_mmu_map_private_pfn() and tdh_mr_extend().
> > 
> > Holding slots_lock prevents zaps due to memslot updates,
> > filemap_invalidate_lock() prevents zaps due to guest_memfd PUNCH_HOLE,
> > and all usage of kvm_zap_gfn_range() is mutually exclusive with S-EPT
> > entries that can be used for the initial image.  The call from sev.c is
> > obviously mutually exclusive, TDX disallows KVM_X86_QUIRK_IGNORE_GUEST_PAT
> > so same goes for kvm_noncoherent_dma_assignment_start_or_stop, and while
> > __kvm_set_or_clear_apicv_inhibit() can likely be tripped while building the
> > image, the APIC page has its own non-guest_memfd memslot and so can't be
> > used for the initial image, which means that too is mutually exclusive.
> > 
> > Opportunistically switch to "goto" to jump around the measurement code,
> > partly to make it clear that KVM needs to bail entirely if extending the
> > measurement fails, partly in anticipation of reworking how and when
> > TDH_MEM_PAGE_ADD is done.
> > 
> > Fixes: d789fa6efac9 ("KVM: TDX: Handle vCPU dissociation")
> 
> So IIUC this patch only adds a KVM_BUG_ON() when TDH.MR.EXTEND fails.  How
> does this fix anything?

Hmm, yeah, I'll drop the Fixes.  It made more sense when I thought it was
impossible for tdh_mr_extend() to fail, as returning an error and not explicitly
terminating the VM was "wrong".  But I agree it does far more harm than good,
even when relocated to the end of the series.